ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences2025
Evaluation of Antimicrobial Orthodontic Adhesives Incorporating Metal-Organic Frameworks.
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Orthodontic adhesives are prone to bacterial colonization, leading to demineralization and white spot lesions during orthodontic treatment. Incorporating antimicrobial agents such as metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) into adhesives offers a novel approach to mitigate bacterial growth. Materials and Methods: A commercially available orthodontic adhesive was modified by incorporating 5% and 10% weight concentrations of a zirconium-based MOF. Samples were prepared and tested for antimicrobial efficacy against Results: The modified adhesives showed significant antimicrobial activity, with a reduction in bacterial colony counts of 72% and 85% for 5% and 10% MOF concentrations, respectively. The zone of inhibition increased proportionally with MOF concentration. The 5% MOF adhesive exhibited a slight reduction in SBS (mean: 18.2 ± 1.5 MPa) compared to the control (mean: 20.1 ± 1.2 MPa), whereas the 10% MOF adhesive showed a more pronounced decrease (mean: 15.6 ± 1.8 MPa). Ion release profiles indicated sustained antimicrobial activity over the test period. Conclusion: The incorporation of MOFs into orthodontic adhesives effectively enhances antimicrobial properties while maintaining acceptable mechanical performance at lower concentrations. This innovative approach could help reduce the risk of enamel demineralization during orthodontic treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.